Sasquatch

Audience Reviews

View All (11)

BRizz 2 Sasquatch is a 1975 action-adventure horror film that follows a team of pioneer scientists on a dangerous expedition into the American wilderness in search of Bigfoot. The film stars George Laura and Steve Bogarín, with direction by Ed Ragozzino. First and foremost, the direction in this film is all over the place. Now, I understand it was made in 1975, and films from that era didn’t have the benefits of today’s technology or pacing. But even by ’70s standards, this one is rough. The storytelling feels disjointed, like it was pieced together with random narration instead of following a cohesive plot. The film doesn’t build tension or develop its characters—it just jumps around without much structure or payoff. The acting? Absolutely awful. I’ve seen plenty of films from the ’70s—some that are surprisingly fantastic and some that are forgettable—but Sasquatch definitely falls into the “unwatchable” category. The performances are wooden and unconvincing, making it hard to care about what’s happening on screen. As far as director Ed Ragozzino goes, this film doesn’t inspire any confidence to look up the rest of his work. Sasquatch is a misfire in nearly every way. I wouldn’t recommend this one—even as a so-bad-it’s-good watch. It just doesn’t deliver. Skip it. Rated 0.5/5 Stars •  Rated 0.5 out of 5 stars 07/04/25 Full Review Audience Member The only sasquatch film I've seen that almost got the sasquatch film right Rated 4.5/5 Stars •  Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars 01/26/23 Full Review Audience Member This is the meat and potatoes of Bigfoot movie lore. The story is inherently silly. A group of scientists set out to search for the land of the Sasquatch which is rumored to be in some remote part of the Pacific Northwest. The only way to get there is on horseback and it takes an injun guide and an old timey coot (even with the tuned up Gabby Hayes hat and white beard) to lead them there. There is a wacky cook that chases possums and trips over stumps. But they have electronic equipment. Oh they see some Bigfoot too. But at that point, the last ten minutes of the movie, even the suited actors are bored with it all and perform their menace with all the swinging arm nonchalance of a catering service ladyâ(TM)s ladling. The movie shines, though for the following reasons : 1. There is the soothing cadence of the science film strip narration, which is missing only the â~beeeeepâ(TM) that let the student helper know to twist the knob to the next slide. It is a skilled mixture of authority, masterful revelry of bad nature writing, and absurdist conclusions (This proved to us that the Bigfoot were intelligent) that passes for scientific observation. 2. The music on the soundtrack is a dreamy, light hearted sort. You know, of that semi-orchestrated county western song variety that Disney used on its tv show, whenever it recycled old Daniel Boone nature footage into new cute animal segments (OH look at the baby raccoons playing with their mama!) 3. The movie incorporates two great Bigfoot legend re-enactments. First the Teddy Roosevelt Bauman Wisdom River attack. Where Bigfoot killed Baumanâ(TM)s unnamed beaver trapping partner. And the second, the 1924 Ape Canyon attack on the miner shed which has been used in other movies and I believe on IN SEARCH OF... 4. The movie passes itself off as a documentary. Though most of the scenes were shot at a distance or from the creatures view stomping through the woods. In the late 70s this was innovative stuff. Especially to a 6 or 7 year old who was watching it. Also, most the Bigfoot stories, including the supposed existence of the expedition, were verifiable in the Bigfoot books that sat in my local library. Adding more speculation and fuel to the imagination. 5. The day for night scenes, which is a good swath of the movies action, really add the full weight of the off-kilter creepiness of deep woods adventure. The long shadows of afternoon and the pale glow that outlined all the actors and cast their faces in differing shades of brightness, really upset the viewers perspective. Night never looks like that and day is never that dark. An alien landscape is created and maintained in which hulking, stinking masses might just be deadly monstrous creatures ready to lob rocks at you. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED! Rated 4.5/5 Stars •  Rated 4.5 out of 5 stars 02/16/23 Full Review Audience Member Where this is more a doc than movie, it's still ok on subject matter. Doesn't hold up well for time Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 01/28/23 Full Review Audience Member Erittäin hyvin alkava, mutta sittemmin pelkäksi metsässä haahuiluksi pelkistyvä dokudraama on lopulta varsin unettava kokonaisuus. Rated 2/5 Stars •  Rated 2 out of 5 stars 02/06/23 Full Review Audience Member Filmen har nok ikke tÃ¥lt tidens tann svært godt, men gode filmer om Bigfoot har vært fÃ¥ og langt i mellom, sÃ¥ denne havner godt over gjennomsnittet hos meg enda. Jeg liker meget godt dokumentar stilen filmskaperne har lagt seg pÃ¥, med mye dyreliv satt i fokus, samt en del generell fakta om Bigfoot, som f.eks. Patterson filmen. Bigfoot portreteres derimot her som regelrett mannevond, og selv om jeg ikke finner dette sÃ¥ veldig passende er det tross alt snakk om en skrekkfilm her. Og da kan man tillate seg slikt. Dessverre er filmen enda svært vanskelig Ã¥ fÃ¥ tak i, og en DVD utgivelse av denne ønskes sÃ¥rt. Rated 4/5 Stars •  Rated 4 out of 5 stars 01/28/23 Full Review Read all reviews

Sasquatch

My Rating

Read More Read Less POST RATING WRITE A REVIEW EDIT REVIEW

Most Popular at Home Now